On Thu, November 01, 2012 at 16:07 (+0100), Chris Mason wrote: > On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 09:01:24AM -0600, Jan Schmidt wrote: >> Hi everybody, >> >> We made a bad mistake with "btrfs send" command line arguments and we'd >> better fix it before it's being widely used (read: *now*). > > Ok, I do agree that -i was confusing. I didn't end up using it in my > backup scripts here.
Good we agree here :-) > How about: > > Make -p and -i mean the same thing. Add -r for what -i should have > done. > > This has the advantage of not breaking the people that did get working > btrfs send setups ;) I'd carefully argue that we're still in the position to break things, because the 3.7 kernel isn't released and you cannot use "btrfs send" without it. The number of users should be really small. I prefer having a clean and painful cut over suffering from bad decisions forever. That may not be the most popular opinion in the world. In the end, I could live with -p and -i doing the same thing. -Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
